Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sun_Tzu
I took offense to all of your posts in this thread, they've been overall of a very poor quality, several times bordering on ad hominem when you run out of real arguments and suffering from a general lack of understanding of the conversation that has preceded it.
Also, "gee, thanks" for "tolerating" my posting.
|
I'm confident that by analysing the applicability of his argument to the game and saying why it isn't applicable and that there are better methods to punish Denial without going overboard that I've avoided ad hominem. Ultimately I've gone through his point and pretty much stated my point of view first and foremost and the points where I attack the methods by which people have asserted their arguments have generally been as asides (regardless of length) rather than the crux of my point.
Ultimately should people be responsible for reporting anything? People exploiting bugs? Which is cheating is it not? This is what the wider thread is about and if people are going to argue about legal principles and their applicability to the game, i'll look at it in the context of the game, the situation at hand and analyse accordingly. The poster I was arguing with even took the time to agree with or at least identify with the alternative solution that I proposed. You talk of running out of arguments, but ultimately there is only one argument here: that thinking of alliances as if they are companies is probably far more relevant and realistic when we see bug exploits/cheating like this. One is all I need as far as i can see.